The Texans still have alot of holes to fill, our secondary is terrible, on the other side of the ball, we need a franchise OL to help the weak side. We also need a solid running back because I think Dominick Davis is prone to injury just like Mcgrady for the Rockets :(

I do think that Kubiak will bring in Plummer as a backup from Denver and I do not see us drafting another QB? What do you guys think, do we stick with the same gameplan as last year and keep trying to beef up the defense and go after FA's for the offense?

Goldeagle

12-25-2006, 10:13 AM

I say trade down if no O-lineman is worth taking where we are at. If AP is gone and you want to stay there, draft the best Safety/Cornerback/ or OLB to help Demeco with the load. Id like to see the O-line and CB position addressed through Free Agency since this years stock of O-lineman seems thin after Joe Thomas. The Texans needs to do EVERYTHING they can to sign Nate Clements because I feel finding a CB like him in the draft is a big time gamble, he is proven.

NEROtheZERO

12-25-2006, 10:59 AM

I say trade down if no O-lineman is worth taking where we are at. If AP is gone and you want to stay there, draft the best Safety/Cornerback/ or OLB to help Demeco with the load. Id like to see the O-line and CB position addressed through Free Agency since this years stock of O-lineman seems thin after Joe Thomas. The Texans needs to do EVERYTHING they can to sign Nate Clements because I feel finding a CB like him in the draft is a big time gamble, he is proven.

It's not that easy.

There has to be (1) a team willing to trade down, (2) a team willing to trade down who offers legit compensation for the trade, and (3) a team willing to trade down who offers legit compensation for the trade who is trading from a spot where we can get a player who we want.

There aren't really any OT coming out this season worth trading down for and we could use a top 10 RB or FS, but even if there were some good OT grading mid-late first round, it's not as easy as snapping your fingers to move down.

dat_boy_yec

12-25-2006, 11:47 AM

Yeah, BPA all the time. Unless it's a position that's already set, but let's be honest we really don't have that now do we.

TexanFan881

12-25-2006, 11:49 AM

I think we have to go secondary in the first round. And at our pick (around 6-8 probably) the best player available will be Branch, Landry, or Hall. When our DL is healthy I think it will improve a lot considering we have a bunch of guys off the streets in there and we're getting some pressure and we have spent our last to first round picks on DL and I really don't want to go there again. So that leaves Landry and Hall, and we could use both and I would be happy with both.

LORK 88

12-25-2006, 11:50 AM

Should be a combination of BPA and need, thats how we did so well last year. We took players that we needed that we good value picks.

Vinny

12-25-2006, 11:52 AM

if you pick at the top of the draft you are making a huge mistake drafting for need unless the best player available grades around the same as your need pick. Drafting for need is something teams should do in the second half of the first round and back imo....for the most part.

South Texan

12-25-2006, 11:58 AM

Let's say that the best player available to us is a wide receiver. Should we pick him so that we can have a bumper sticker saying "My other receiver is an Andre Johnson too."?

I think not.

Rick Smith is going to have to earn his salary this offseason. I am looking for a lot of horse trading with our draft picks and Free Agency to fill the holes in the O-Line and secondary. And of course to add to the mix is the status of Spencer and Davis. All I can say is "Good Luck Mr. Smith."

Ole Miss Texan

12-25-2006, 12:06 PM

if you pick at the top of the draft you are making a huge mistake drafting for need unless the best player available grades around the same as your need pick. Drafting for need is something teams should do in the second half of the first round and back imo....for the most part.

taking strictly the bpa is what normal teams should do. The texans have so many needs that is is a lot easier to have the bpa or one extremely close to it at a position of much need. when you strictly draft for need is bad for other teams that really stretch that pick...say pick a guy that fits their need when his "draft grade" is many many spots lower.

Mario was a combination imo. need/bpa

For instance..Landry/Hall are both consistently top 10 players drafted in mocks (who knows what happens on draft day). Picking them based on need is not bad because they could be bpa or close. Picking a guy like Dwayne Jarret/ tedd ginn jr. who could potentially be bpa when we draft would not be a good idea. conversely picking an OL someone like levi brown maybe? at our #6-8 spot would probably be a stretch for them and a pick strictly for our need.

Vinny

12-25-2006, 12:08 PM

Let's say that the best player available to us is a wide receiver. Should we pick him so that we can have a bumper sticker saying "My other receiver is an Andre Johnson too."?

I think not.

Rick Smith is going to have to earn his salary this offseason. I am looking for a lot of horse trading with our draft picks and Free Agency to fill the holes in the O-Line and secondary. And of course to add to the mix is the status of Spencer and Davis. All I can say is "Good Luck Mr. Smith." I don't think that Arizona is unhappy with Boldin and Fitz. They have issues but their passing game is explosive.

TexanFan881

12-25-2006, 12:14 PM

Let's say that the best player available to us is a wide receiver. Should we pick him so that we can have a bumper sticker saying "My other receiver is an Andre Johnson too."?

I think not.

Rick Smith is going to have to earn his salary this offseason. I am looking for a lot of horse trading with our draft picks and Free Agency to fill the holes in the O-Line and secondary. And of course to add to the mix is the status of Spencer and Davis. All I can say is "Good Luck Mr. Smith."

I look forward to see what Rick can get us. He's done an amazingly good job so far, picking up players not on teams during the season and making it work. And the huge pickup of a much needed FB in Vonta Leach :) I honestly think this will be one of our best offseasons yet. I'd be pretty happy if it turned out like it did last year (we filled two needs in free agency: WR, DT; and four in the draft: TE, MLB, DE, OL - whatever ones you want to put Spencer and Winston in) If we can get a couple good players like last year (Moulds and Weaver) and then fill needs in the draft like we did last year, man will I be excited next year.

kastofsna

12-25-2006, 12:17 PM

yes. first round is always BPA.

Goldeagle

12-25-2006, 01:21 PM

It's not that easy.

There has to be (1) a team willing to trade down, (2) a team willing to trade down who offers legit compensation for the trade, and (3) a team willing to trade down who offers legit compensation for the trade who is trading from a spot where we can get a player who we want.

Yes, I know, Im just saying :)

Napa Auto Parts

12-25-2006, 01:57 PM

As long as we dont draft by need like we did last year we know how that's turning out we missed out on two very specials players and got mario a decent player but not special:stirpot:

Texan in Japan

12-25-2006, 04:43 PM

Their are always some suprises in the top 10; by taking BPA we can see what gem may fall to us between 6-10.

TexansLucky13

12-25-2006, 04:48 PM

Last year the FO had two guys tied for BPA.... Mario Williams and Reggie Bush. Since we needed a DE more than a RB at the time, the decision was made for Mario.

That is how I think all drafts in the first round should work. BPA with consideration of need.

Texas_Thrill

12-25-2006, 05:58 PM

i think it depends on how you want to build your franchise. also how BAD is your need position.

i think last year bush was clearly the BPA at our pick. that being said williams was close enough and our defense was BAD enough that you could justify taking him over bush.

Texian

12-25-2006, 06:24 PM

You take the player who is going to have the biggest impact on your team. In the Texans case their weakest link is defensive secondary. LaRon Landry or Hall will instantly make them better.

DenverBorn

12-25-2006, 06:30 PM

I think we'll draft at 9 and our choices will be Reggie Nelson or Levi Brown. I can see us going in either direction. I'd probably lean to OT as I think very capable safeties are available in rounds 2-4

Honoring Earl 34

12-25-2006, 09:46 PM

In the words of Mick Jagger ... you cain't always get what you want .... but if you try sometimes ... you just might find ... you get what you need .

Ole Miss Texan

12-26-2006, 12:25 AM

As long as we dont draft by need like we did last year we know how that's turning out we missed out on two very specials players and got mario a decent player but not special:stirpot:

I disagree. :stirpot:

Last year the FO had two guys tied for BPA.... Mario Williams and Reggie Bush. Since we needed a DE more than a RB at the time, the decision was made for Mario.

That is how I think all drafts in the first round should work. BPA with consideration of need.

I agree completely. The farther down the draft you get the fuzzier it gets...Us being 7-9ish? still fairly clear...I have a feeling that the bpa will be the same as an area of need, the question is which one...since we need Secondary help moreso this year...I see us Picking Landry/Nelson or CB over somebody else.

Ole Miss Texan

12-26-2006, 12:25 AM

In the words of Mick Jagger ... you cain't always get what you want .... but if you try sometimes ... you just might find ... you get what you need .

oh and..lol great song

painekiller

12-26-2006, 12:42 AM

...since we need Secondary help moreso this year...I see us Picking Landry/Nelson or CB over somebody else.

Oh we needed it last year too, we just did not address it. Also we may need to address SAM LB, and Posluszny also will fit the bill. That said I currently see us missing out on Thomas and Branch, so my next guy for us is Landry. I see him as a stud.

Just to tickle some of guys who dig sleepers fancy, the Safety from Hawaii right now would be available 2nd day and he looks pretty good. Might be a good depth guy. Not sure if he is a SS or a FS.

mexican_texan

12-26-2006, 12:45 AM

I trust the FO's ability to draft good players, as it's the first time I can remember that all draft picks started for their respective team, if you count PR as a starting position for Anderson. BPA all the way.

Ole Miss Texan

12-26-2006, 02:34 AM

Oh we needed it last year too, we just did not address it. Also we may need to address SAM LB, and Posluszny also will fit the bill. That said I currently see us missing out on Thomas and Branch, so my next guy for us is Landry. I see him as a stud.

Just to tickle some of guys who dig sleepers fancy, the Safety from Hawaii right now would be available 2nd day and he looks pretty good. Might be a good depth guy. Not sure if he is a SS or a FS.

If we were to go linebacker route I'd rather see us pick up Patrick Willis than Poz. Willis is a pure beast and is MLB which can move Ryans to his original olb position....however ryans is doing great in the middle so leave him there. Willis is good enough to play inside or outside..he played outside the last 3 years at ole miss i believe and then switched to middle this season. I think we need fs/cb for 1st more than linebacker but i trust whatever they do.

Just heard of Leonard Peters last night. Read a little about him...FS from Hawaii. could be a great pick up if they wait for him maybe.

Back to the main point..If The best pick available when we pick is Patrick Willis, MLB, Ole Miss. would you want us to pick him? By draft day he could be rated higher than landry, nelson, any cb. I feel there would be other players that would impact this team quicker but how do yall feel. with saying strictly bpa.

brewhaus

12-26-2006, 05:17 AM

I haven't read every post in this thread so I apologize if I repeat.

I personally am on the O Line bandwagon for the '07 draft. But, there is a school of thought that says you draft the best "athlete" available. So when I think "athlete" I'm thinking more along the lines of D Back, which we need badly or Linebacker, which we also need.

Buckle

12-26-2006, 09:28 AM

The safety from Hawaii (Leonard Peters) plays FS but I think we could move him to SS like the Steelers did with Polamulu since Peters plays alot like him. My hope for our offseason is that we sign Nate Clements, get either Nelson or Landry in the 1st, use the 2nd round pick as BPA between RB or LB. then use our 3rd round pick on Peters and put him at SS and use our currents players as backups. Then go BPA in rounds 4-7. We could also probably trade a couple spots back in the 1st round to pick up a couple other draft picks to get another 2nd or 3rd and still get Landry or Nelson. Our secondary would immediately be upgraded and could become a force with Clements, Robinson, Nelson/Landry and Peters.

ArlingtonTexan

12-26-2006, 09:46 AM

I am believer in taking the BPA, meaning the CLEARLY best player available. If you are close take the need pick. In the Texans current case, I would argue there are very few places that don't need at least depth if not outright a starter. the key then becomes to properly prioritizing which needs are greatest or which position have more depth to be addressed later.

Mr teX

12-26-2006, 11:00 AM

if you pick at the top of the draft you are making a huge mistake drafting for need unless the best player available grades around the same as your need pick. Drafting for need is something teams should do in the second half of the first round and back imo....for the most part.

Look at the Lions the last couple of years that's all they've been doing is drafting BPA & it hasn't worked out for them. Likewise for the Bengals pre-marvin lewis. You have to have a gameplan, not simply just take the BPA just b/c they're there. If we can't get JT, I wouldn't mind seeing us trade down & still maybe being able to pick up a solid number 2 CB/FS or maybe lamar Woodley if he's there. Of course i would prefer we hit the FA market, but it all depends.

Kaiser Toro

12-26-2006, 11:02 AM

As we look at our potential draft position and our need we could be looking at having a perfect match with Hall or Landry as the BPA, thus filling our biggest need.

kastofsna

12-26-2006, 11:02 AM

look at the patriots and chargers, they're pretty notorious for going on BPA. worked for them. jimmy johnson went BPA always.

Mr teX

12-26-2006, 11:13 AM

look at the patriots and chargers, they're pretty notorious for going on BPA. worked for them. jimmy johnson went BPA always.

Good point, but i just think that for us, right now what we need is a player that will fit what we're trying to do here; You know establish an identity (Defense or Offense?) But in the same breath i'll say that we have so many deficiencies that it's going to be hard for us NOT to pick someone that is at least not considered one of the BPA's at his position.